frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

The Brain's Map of the Body Is Surprisingly Stable–Even After a Limb Is Lost

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-brains-map-of-the-body-is-surprisingly-stable-even...
1•Jimmc414•1m ago•0 comments

Handling long-running LLM streams in a stateful backend

https://blog.leap.new/blog/llm-streams
1•eandre•1m ago•0 comments

SMS URLs

https://sethmlarson.dev/sms-urls
1•helle253•1m ago•0 comments

Exploring the Dominion of Anoma

https://research.anoma.net/t/exploring-the-dominion-of-anoma-a-distributed-operating-system/1055
1•churchofturing•2m ago•0 comments

Cloudflare AI Gateway now gives you access to your favorite AI models

https://blog.cloudflare.com/ai-gateway-aug-2025-refresh/
1•AtroxDev•3m ago•0 comments

AI Native Infrastructure Automation

https://www.systeminit.com/blog/ai-native-infrastructure-automation/
10•u_magistr•4m ago•1 comments

ChatGPT can count to at least 1500 – just ask nicely

https://chatgpt.com/share/68af17bd-a42c-8010-b2d3-827ce3c64b5d
2•nhp_fermi•4m ago•0 comments

Open-source political system – Automatism [pdf]

https://github.com/GuzhiRegem/automatism/blob/main/Automatism.pdf
1•guzhiregem•5m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: How do you prevent or resolve cofounder conflict?

2•shunicorn•5m ago•0 comments

Teen killed himself after 'months of encouragement from ChatGPT', lawsuit claims

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/aug/27/chatgpt-scrutiny-family-teen-killed-himself-su...
2•skor•7m ago•0 comments

Google Vids adds AI avatars and launches a consumer version

https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/27/google-vids-adds-ai-avatars-to-its-video-editor-and-launches-a-...
2•geox•8m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Vanitycert.com – Automated Custom Domains and SSL for SaaS

https://www.vanitycert.com/
1•lulceltech•11m ago•0 comments

Microsoft can't guarantee data sovereignty – OVHcloud says 'We told you so'

https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/27/ovhcloud_interview/
1•rntn•13m ago•0 comments

Google's AI model nailed the forecast for the strongest Atlantic storm this year

https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/08/googles-ai-model-just-nailed-the-forecast-for-the-stronge...
2•Workaccount2•13m ago•0 comments

Show HN: A math tutor that won't hallucinate answers (ChatGPT and Photomath)

https://thinkercan.com/
1•noygaryan•17m ago•0 comments

Social media users rubbish at spotting sneaky ads, say boffins

https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/14/boffins_social_media_users_rubbish/
1•PaulHoule•18m ago•2 comments

ICANN is finally recognising Organization as the legal owner of domains

https://www.icann.org/en/contracted-parties/consensus-policies/registration-data-policy
1•gregorvand•18m ago•0 comments

Noom's Tech Evaluation: Top AI Mobile Test Automation Tools (August 2025)

https://www.mobileboost.io/post/technical-evaluation-top-14-ai-mobile-test-automation-tools-augus...
1•chrtng•18m ago•0 comments

Electric Vehicle vs. Gas Car Calculator

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/08/27/upshot/ev-vs-gas-calculator.html
1•mooreds•20m ago•0 comments

Home Assistant and Ubiquiti and AI = Home Automation Magic

https://www.troyhunt.com/home-assistant-ubiquiti-ai-home-automation-magic/
1•LorenDB•20m ago•0 comments

Why Use Lucky?

https://luckyframework.org/guides/getting-started/why-lucky
1•mooreds•21m ago•0 comments

Beyond the Terminal: Gemini CLI Comes to Zed Blog

https://developers.googleblog.com/pt-br/gemini-cli-is-now-integrated-into-zed/
2•dmmalam•21m ago•0 comments

Show HN: React Web Camera – Fix <input type=file> single-photo limit

https://shivantra.com/react-web-camera/
4•painternishant•21m ago•0 comments

Let's Make Sure GitHub Doesn't Become the Only Option

https://blog.edwardloveall.com/lets-make-sure-github-doesnt-become-the-only-option
1•freediver•22m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: How to convince parents that half-hearted MS is worthless?

2•shivajikobardan•22m ago•1 comments

Fabric8Labs ECAM Enabled Thermal Solutions at Hot Chips 2025

https://www.servethehome.com/fabric8labs-ecam-enabled-thermal-solutions-at-hot-chips-2025/
1•ksec•22m ago•0 comments

Google's Ironwood TPU Swings for Reasoning Model Leadership at Hot Chips 2025

https://www.servethehome.com/googles-ironwood-tpu-swings-for-reasoning-model-leadership-at-hot-ch...
3•ksec•23m ago•2 comments

Inside Zig's New Writer

https://joegm.github.io/blog/inside-zigs-new-writer-interface/
4•joemck•23m ago•0 comments

What Is Included in a Stock Price?

https://www.six-group.com/en/blog/more-than-just-a-price.html
1•mooreds•23m ago•0 comments

JWST detection of a carbon dioxide dominated gas coma surrounding 3I/ATLAS

https://zenodo.org/records/16941949
2•belter•25m ago•0 comments
Open in hackernews

SpaceX's giant Starship Mars rocket nails critical 10th test flight

https://www.space.com/space-exploration/private-spaceflight/spacex-launches-starship-flight-10-critical-test-flight-video
124•mpweiher•2h ago

Comments

fluoridation•1h ago
How much money did it cost to orbit Saturn V (including R&D of course)?
voidUpdate•1h ago
According to wikipedia, the entire cost of the saturn v project was US$185 million, equivalent to US$33.6 billion today. That's from R&D to all launches
fluoridation•1h ago
Yes, I also can look trivial stuff up. That would include costs after the rocket first orbited the Earth, so it doesn't answer my question.
anonymars•55m ago
No need to be condescending when communication is ambiguous. Your question can be better phrased as, "How much did it cost for Saturn V to reach the point where it could successfully orbit?" which I assume means "how much did it cost up to and including Apollo 4?"
dylan604•38m ago
Wouldn't the cost of all of Mercury and Gemini missions need to be included in this as they could not have Apollo without the others first.
fluoridation•31m ago
Those weren't on the Saturn V, though. They were various rockets for Mercury, and Titan II for Gemini.
dylan604•25m ago
Do you think they would/could have built the Saturn V without building the other engines first?
fluoridation•17m ago
If we're going down this road, we'd have to include the global GDP back thousands of years. I asked specifically about Saturn V so I could make a reasonable comparison between it and Starship.
anonymars•14m ago
I think as phrased this is going to get way too pedantic. But I think it raises a larger point which is worthy to consider.

Presumably what we're trying to get at is, in broad strokes, "is Starship more cost-effective to develop than Saturn V" (and I assume the follow-on for that will be to compare the "NASA approach" vs the "SpaceX approach")

But you raise a good point in that the baseline playing field is completely different. The existing knowledge each program started with, be it in materials science, understanding of rocket combustion, heat shield technology, sensors, simulation ability, you name it, it's completely different. So we can find and pull out whatever numbers, but I don't think it's possible for them to say anything meaningful for comparison on their own.

ralfd•52m ago
You mis-copied the numbers for one launch. Wiki says:

> Project cost US$6.417 billion (equivalent to $33.6 billion in 2023)

> Cost per launch US$185 million (equivalent to $969 million in 2023)

That a manned Apollo mission would/did cost under a billion dollars (todays money) is surprisingly cheap. A single Artemis launch using the Space Launch System (SLS) costs an eye watering $4 billions.

Different metric:

> [1966] NASA received its largest total budget of $4.5 billion, about 0.5 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) of the United States at that time.

Using that metric NASA yearly budget would with todays GDP be $150 billion dollars.

nashashmi•49m ago
In recent years, NASA’s budget has hovered around $25–27 billion.

This represents less than 0.5% of the total U.S. federal budget, though it’s one of the most visible and impactful science agencies

voidUpdate•42m ago
facepalm not sure how I misread that
mikepurvis•27m ago
Some of this was the overall urgency of the 1960s space race, that people were motivated to cut through red tape and get it done, and I know it's also argued that modern safety standards and requirements around supply chain, real time monitoring, system redundancy, etc all complicate things and raise costs.

That said, it would be interesting to have someone really knowledgeable go over what it is that Artemis has and Saturn V didn't, and then break them down and assign each an approximate cost.

boxed•1h ago
Adding to previous comment, looks like the cost per launch when the system was up and running was ~1billion USD inflation adjusted. I'm going to assume Starship will beat that easily.
loeg•45m ago
Looks like Starship test flights are already beating that $1 billion per-launch cost (I'm seeing estimates in the $100-500 million range), and they'd like to get the marginal cost down to ~$10 million.
staplung•37m ago
Maybe, but remember that getting astronauts to the moon and back took a single Saturn V launch but with Starship, it will take (at least) 10 flights for refueling, possibly as many as 20. So each launch has to be much cheaper to beat Saturn V for the full mission.

Nobody but SpaceX knows how much each Starship test costs but the estimates online range from $50 million to $200 million. Presumably, whatever the actual cost, they're more expensive right now while they're redesigning bits and doing custom, one-off work for each flight but it has a long way to go to beat Saturn V for the full mission.

briandw•24m ago
A starship mission to the moon will land over 100tons of cargo. Saturn V could get roughly 5tons to the surface. Its an entirely different class of operation.
thatoneguy•57m ago
How does that matter? It's doing a thing already done nearly 70 years ago but at its own pace.

I bet it will get to the moon cheaper, too, and the Muskonauts will use less expensive lenses than Hasselblads to take photos.

fluoridation•33m ago
Starship isn't exactly the same as Saturn V. It's bigger, for one.

The reason why it matters is that efficiency matters. It's fine if it takes longer, not so much if it costs way, way more, especially if such a huge rocket has limited applications. And as I understand it the consensus is that Starship (or at least a fully-loaded Starship) will never go to the Moon. Once it's in orbit it takes like twenty refueling launches and space rendezvous to fill it up again so it can make the transfer burn. In other words, it's never happening.

stetrain•29m ago
I think that understanding of the consensus is incorrect. The mission plan for Artemis 3 is that a specialized Starship upper stage will be refueled in LEO and then transfer to lunar orbit where it will wait for astronauts arriving on SLS/Orion.

Yes the mission profile is more complex, but that complexity can mostly be settled before the astronauts launch on their mission.

NASA seems to think it is a viable plan which is why they selected SpaceX to execute that part of the mission.

fluoridation•19m ago
Wikipedia:

> After a multi-phase design effort, on April 16, 2021, NASA selected SpaceX to develop Starship HLS and deliver it to near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO) prior to arrival of the crew for use on the Artemis III mission. The delivery requires that Starship HLS be refueled in Earth orbit before boosting to the NRHO, and this refueling requires a pre-positioned propellant depot in Earth orbit that is filled by multiple (at least 14) tanker flights.

I stand by what I said: not happening. I'll believe it when I see it.

Can you imagine if to make a sightseeing trip to another city you had to stop in the middle of the highway and then make 14 round-trips with a second car to fill your first car back up? I can't imagine why someone would approve this plan, other than corruption.

DarmokJalad1701•9m ago
> Can you imagine if to make a sightseeing trip to another city you had to stop in the middle of the highway and then make 14 round-trips with a second car to fill your first car back up?

If the alternative was throwing away and building/buying a new car for every trip? Absolutely.

They said the same about landing a first stage booster - impossible and pointless to attempt. And it just happened for the 400th time yesterday.

stetrain•5m ago
How did the fuel you put in your car get there? Your car didn't come with all of the fuel for the trip, nor did it spawn at the gas pump.

It was pumped, shipped, refined, and trucked to that point using a complex supply chain, enabling your final trip to happen with one fuel transfer.

andsoitis•1h ago
"That was absolutely incredible," SpaceX Build Reliability Engineer Amanda Lee said during live launch commentary. "A huge congrats to all the teams here."

"Great work by the SpaceX team!!!" SpaceX CEO Elon Musk wrote on X after the flight.

Amazing accomplishment. Always a thrill to watch live.

SpaceX conducted 134 launches in 2024 and is targeting a record-breaking 160-170 orbital launches in 2025.

https://www.spacex.com/launches

perihelions•1h ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45033563 (195 comments)
seatac76•50m ago
Amazing achievement. Just watching no that giant thing lift off is a great feeling.
criddell•27m ago
I know it's a similar size to the Saturn V, but something about the Saturn V just seems grander to me. Maybe it's the paint job?

Frankly, it kind of blows my mind what the US pulled off in the late 60's, early 70's with the technology and materials of the time.

ekianjo•21m ago
They had virtually infinite budget at the time. SpaceX is much, much cheaper.
fhd2•14m ago
Is it though? I'm not knowledgeable on this at all, but it _seems_ like Space X is blowing up a lot more expensive equipment compared to NASA back in the space race days. Genuinely curious how it compares and how true my outsider impression is.
onlyrealcuzzo•8m ago
Not to mention the mountain of prior art to work off of...

It's way harder to do it the first time.

throwawaymaths•6m ago
saturn v was about 30B in 2025 dollars. starship has cost on the order of 5B so far.

raptor engines are designed to be cost efficient, as is the rolled steel? that is used for the fuselage

mjamesaustin•6m ago
They can spend numerous ships testing because the cost is dramatically lower per ship.

As with any manufactured item, high volume and iterative design improves the production process and finished product.

kilroy123•14m ago
It's pretty remarkable progress. Slowly but surely, they're getting it done. I predict they'll have a full working version by 2027. By 2028, they'll have regular reusable flights.
Romario77•41m ago
It was a significant progress, but I won't call it "nailed it". As there was an damage or explosion on re-entry where the skirt of the starship got damaged. And we could see pretty significant damage on one of the fins.

Nailing it would be without the things above.

stetrain•39m ago
Yes, although it was stated before the flight that they were intentionally flying with some heat tiles removed and with a more aggressive profile to test some outer limits.
ballenf•15m ago
They even removed some near fuel tanks. In the past the missing tiles were in less critical areas.

I'm surprised they didn't take less risks just to avoid a narrative of failure.

ndr•8m ago
Why would they need to care about narrative at this point?

It's privately own, might as well learn as much as possible with each dollar spent.

NitpickLawyer•7m ago
> I'm surprised they didn't take less risks just to avoid a narrative of failure.

That's the advantage of being privately owned. "Vibes" (hah) don't matter. Public opinion doesn't matter. What matters is executing on your vision / goals. And they're doing that.

The fact that they're bringing in loads of cash from Starlink surely helps. They haven't had the need to raise money in a while, now.

megaman821•33m ago
I think this launch showed they were very robust. Engines went out on booster and ship which they can compensate for. A small explosion and a half melted fin didn't seem to affect the splashdown sequence or target.
gcanyon•27m ago
The explosion was unexpected and (as far as I know at the moment) unexplained, but they flew the mission at the edge of the envelope, and with a variety of different materials/missing bits on purpose, to better understand where the edge is. Everything that happened (maybe even including the explosion, we'll see in the final analysis) was, as far as we know, within the plan.

The biggest can't-miss milestone was the flawless engine restart. That gives them the go-ahead to hit orbit on the next flight.

ge96•24m ago
The deployment system was interesting, how the last one in the layer would go back then forward before releasing.
foobarian•16m ago
It looked like something one would cobble together from a garage opener and weld together a bunch of rebar
NitpickLawyer•9m ago
You should have seen the first tech demonstrator for the Raptor engine (the family that powers Starship). It was basically a water tower (built out in the desert, welded by people specialising in building water towers). But it flew, and it landed, and then it served as a lights & camera mount for the field for a few years.
baq•21m ago
I'd say the payload door situation is a considerable success, at least as big as the relight itself.
ekianjo•23m ago
> And we could see pretty significant damage on one of the fin

They specifically said they're testing lighter fins to see how much they would hold. Let's not invent problems when it's an experiment that was clearly stated.

gtirloni•18m ago
Is it common to plan an explosion to test how something will react in these launches? Honest question, I know nothing about rockets.

In SRE, we have chaos engineering so I'm wondering if it's the same concept.

GeekyBear•8m ago
It's very common for extremely hot metal pressure tanks to rupture when plunged into water.
bpodgursky•17m ago
For Starlink deploys (or other commercial launches) re-entry isn't too critical. Starship is still an order of magnitude cheaper than other launch vehicles even without Stage 2 re-use.

They'll need a higher bar for Artemis but frankly Starship is not the only critical bottleneck there and it's not SpaceX's main financial driver.

moralestapia•8m ago
This guy ... MEGA lmao.

To the contrary, I am fascinated by what SpaceX has accomplished so far. I wouldn't just say they "nailed it" they completely blew past all expectations I had.

"Why didn't just get it right on their first test", really? People can't even get a regex right the first time.

Are you aware of the size of this rocket? That it reached orbit? That it hovered over the ocean instead of just crashing into it? That it came back into a point with such precision that a buoy with a camera was already waiting for it? From orbit (that its 30,000km/h and 150km high)?

Your comment is just ridiculous.

enraged_camel•8m ago
I view it differently. The ship not only survived, but also accomplished all of its mission objectives despite those issues. What this shows is that it has remarkable resilience, which is a really important considering the types of forces it will be subject to during future missions.
nomilk•40m ago
Given the results of test 10 (successful splash down of Starship), any ideas what test 11 will entail? Could we be looking at a chopstick catch of the Starship itself?
stetrain•36m ago
I wouldn't expect that on the next flight.

One option is they can run it again with the data gained from missing tiles etc. and see if there is an improvement.

They could also do a similar flight but with an actual orbital insertion and de-orbit if they are confident in the odds of success of the de-orbit burn.

Landing the ship at the launch site means overflying land and potentially populated areas, so I think they're going to want to demonstrate successful control, re-entry, and landing from orbit a few times before attempting that.

plqbfbv•31m ago
That's not out of reach/plans according to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starship_launches#Futu...

But I agree with you, I'd rather have test flight 11 demonstrate at least another successful reentry with no issues (they had a non-fatal explosion on ship reentry in flight 10) before attempting to catch the booster AND landing the ship.

redox99•30m ago
Probably the same as 10, but with SHB catch.
potato3732842•25m ago
They're probably gonna keep wasting ships until they've got the exact limits of their capability established.

I know it seems counterintuitive to everyone who grew up in the era of the space shuttle, but the ship is the cheap part, the giant booster is the expensive part.

The ship has a way longer cycle time so starship unit costs are going to dominate fleet construction cost despite being the cheaper unit so knowing exactly how hard you can run them is very valuable information it's worth gleaning by wasting some units early on.

baq•11m ago
The money is in Starlink, so maybe they'll want to make orbit having demonstrated successful relights and payload door operation?
enraged_camel•40m ago
Incredible achievement, but what is more incredible is how many people (including almost all of my friends circle) have started rooting for SpaceX to fail due to the shenanigans of its founder.

I think as a culture we've lost the ability to compartmentalize. We should be able to criticize and even despise the head of a company, and at the same time celebrate when the intelligence and hard work of the countless smart and hard-working people at that company push the boundaries of what is possible for humanity.

maxehmookau•38m ago
Maybe. But also as the founder and largest shareholder is someone willing to funnel money in to far-right causes across Europe, it's really hard to root for the company as a whole.

Advancing human scientific progress, but at what cost?

lstodd•20m ago
At a cost of indiscriminately imprisoning and killing people (remember Korolyov and von Braun)? Surely. he-he.

If Musk does achieve a second foothold for the humanity, then any and all objections to his methods become irrelevant. So far he does deliver. So we wait for the final result.

Also, if you don't know, we've got a war in europe for like 3.5 years already. I'm seriously curious how many times a space-x total program cost since their start in 2000s has been already sunk into that.

nerdjon•29m ago
This is something I am finding myself wrestling with a lot right now.

On the one hand I am a major space nerd and I see the value of what SpaceX is doing. Especially with it really seeming like no one is anywhere near their level. What kind of scientific advancements will be possible once this thing can be used normally and launches like this become commonplace.

But at the same time it is impossible to ignore the Elon situation. And that also directly relates to Trump as well. We are in this bonkers situation where he helped get a largely anti-science administration in power and yet also runs one of the companies that will help science.

It does raise serious questions about whether or not there will be limitations on what types of science can be done. Will they have some line in the sand and say they won't launch satellites that do "X", like maybe monitor climate change.

I think maybe rooting for them to fail is a bit much, but I am sure as hell hoping that someone else can catch up. But in the mean time I will celebrate these achievements cautiously. Recognizing the amazing work that the engineers at SpaceX have put into this, because they do deserve a lot of credit for that.

bethekidyouwant•19m ago
“a satellite that monitors climate change” - really you think Elon Musk is not gonna fly satellites with instruments on them that point downwards?
nerdjon•7m ago
I am stating an example due to the current political discourse over climate change not that it would be something they specifically would not do.

My point with stating it, is it is not unreasonable to ask the question if we are reliant on a company with someone like Elon owning it is what the company will and will not fly going to be dependent on politics.

bilsbie•6m ago
What if the guy who built the world’s best rocket from scratch, who popularized EVs and brought self-driving tech to the masses, who built brain computer interfaces, dug tunnels, started OpenAI and PayPal…

What if he’s not an idiot?

What if we should actually be listening to what this guy says and considering it?

What if he has the same ability to see what nobody else can see early on in politics…

As he’s shown across the rest of his career?

yepyip•28m ago
Sorry to say this, but your friend circle might not be the best people you can communicate with, given their behaviour. Next day they will turn against you, even if you had done nothing wrong. NPCs will follow "the current thing", you don't have to join them in their stupidity.
bad_haircut72•25m ago
Socialize the adoration, privatize the benefits. Should peasants be proud of their kings palace?
saubeidl•14m ago
Wernher von Braun had the incredible achievement of shooting the first rocket up to space - the V2.

Thanks to the intelligence and hard work of the countless smart and hard-working people he pushed the boundaries of what is possible for humanity.

Still, I find it hard to accept we should compartmentalize and not think about who those rockets were built for and with what purpose.